Monthly Archives: June 2009

Media Criticism, Space

No, He Didn’t

10 Comments

Yes, he survived the meteorite hit, but there’s no way that it was going that fast when it hit him:

This 14-year-old boy is Gerrit Blank, and he is probably smiling because he survived a 30,000 mph meteorite hit.

This is annoying, and misleading. Julie Banderas was discussing this on the Fox Report last night, as well, and it’s clear that everyone in the media believes that the object was going that fast when it hit him.

But that was its speed prior to entering the atmosphere, not at the end of its trajectory. Much of it was burned up, and the bit that remained was slowed tremendously from air drag by the time it got down to ground level. It might even have been at terminal velocity by that point, depending on how much energy it lost, which would probably only be a few hundred feet per second at most (depending on the density and size). If it had really been going that fast when it hit him, it would have been a kinetic-energy bomb, and blown his hand off, if not his arm and destroying the rest of his body. Anyway, there’s no way for anyone to know how fast it was really going, though one could make a crude guess if they had the piece and looked at the nature of the injury.

Business, Economics, Political Commentary, Space

More History Lessons For Senator Shelby

4 Comments

Jeff Krukin’s piece has been republished over at the Commercial Space Gateway, with a lot of comments (including one commenter who doesn’t know where the Delta IV is manufactured, or where the Atlas V is planned to be).

[Update a few minutes later]

Actually, in rereading that comment (I notice now it was from the SSF’s Bob Werb, who presumably does know where the EELVs are built), it was probably sarcasm.

Political Commentary, War Commentary

“Iran On Fire”

17 Comments

Is the country on the verge, or already in, a civil war? Michael Totten is on the case. Hit his tip jar if you can.

[Update a couple hours later]

More over at Gateway Pundit.

[Late afternoon update]

More from Michael Totten: Insurrection, Day Two.

More news at PJM. This is interesting:

There are widespread reports of police and security forces, around Tehran and other big cities where there have been demonstrations, who are not Iranian and either speak Persian with a very pronounced Arab accent or speak no Persian at all.

From Iraq? Or elsewhere?

[Update early evening]

Iran doesn’t have elections — it has circuses:

Stalin would be proud. But even his Soviet Union eventually succumbed to the dissidents, and while the regime has most all of the guns, the chains, the clubs, the tear gas cannisters, and the torture chambers, there are tens of millions of Iranians who hate the regime. The question is whether they are prepared to face down the Basij, the police, and the Revolutionary Guards. It is usually a matter of numbers in these cases: if a million people gather in front of the Supreme Leader’s palace and demand freedom, while half that number make the same demand in front of the government buildings in Isfahan, Shiraz, Tabriz and Mashad, they might win.

Until quite recently, the Iranians did not believe they could do such a thing on their own. They believed they needed outside support, above all American support, in order to succeed. They thought that Bushitlercheney would provide that support, and they were bitterly disappointed. But nobody believes that Obama will help them, and they must know that they are on their own.

Any hope they might have had in the Obama White House was quickly dismissed in the administration’s two statements on the matter. The first came from the president himself, anticipating a Mousavi victory (it is too soon to speculate on the source of this happy thought), and of course, in his narcissistic way, taking personal credit for it:

“We are excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran and obviously, after the speech that I made in Cairo, we tried to send a clear message that we think there’s a possibility of change and, ultimately, the election is for the Iranians to decide but just as what has been true in Lebanon, what can be true in Iran as well, is that you’re seeing people looking at new possiblities, and whoever ends up winning the election in Iran, the fact that there’s been a robust debate hopefully will help advance our ability to engage them in new ways.”

I’ve reread the Cairo Sermon, and I can’t find a single word calling for freedom for the Iranian people. Au contraire, Obama’s words about Iran were penitent, apologizing for the American role, back in 1953, in removing what the president called an elected government (Mossadeq, that is. Except that he was appointed by the shah, not elected at all). But then, history is not his strong suit.

No, it never has been.

On the other hand, as Michael points out, the Bush administration never covered itself in glory with Iran policy, either. There was a potentially huge pro-American youth movement there that they never engaged. I though that one of the (many) purposes of removing Saddam Hussein was to intimidate the Iranian regime and encourage its opponents, but that was never obvious from administration policy post 2003. Colin Powell never really bought into that grand strategy, and perhaps Condi didn’t either. Seriously, this time, I say that I blame George Bush.

Business, Economics, Political Commentary

We Have Ways…

22 Comments

…of making you take the bus:

In this new religion, taking the bus, riding a bike, or walking instead of driving are pious good works. And there is no surmounting the religion’s faith in solving transportation problems by addressing every mode of transit but what most people actually use to get from point A to point B.

During Idaho’s last legislative session, the legislature was presented with information that our existing highways and bridges were in disrepair. One State Senate Democrat focused on the “need” for bike lanes even in rural areas, where riding a bicycle is not an option for most because of the distance involved. Yes, I’m sure there are some people that ride their bicycles in Challis (pop: 909) but does it really make sense to spend the money?

It seems that part of the faith is that these options — even if barely used — are good in and of themselves.

Of course, empty bike lanes are a waste of money. Empty buses are a waste of money and fuel. In the private sector, a company whose service was as unpopular as mass transit would carefully evaluate the service and the marketing, and figure out why people don’t ride.

Not so much with the federal government. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood admitted at the National Press Club recently, regarding the administration’s policies: “It is a way to coerce people out of their cars.”

And here’s some more of this fascistic foolishness from the new Transportation Secretary:

The conservative columnist George Will recently denounced you as the “secretary of behavior modification,” in reference to your plan to have Americans give up cars.
When George came over here for lunch, I could tell from the tone of our conversation that he wasn’t particularly keen on what we were trying to promote here.

You first were elected to Congress out of Peoria, Ill., as part of the so-called Republican revolution.
I came to Congress in 1994. I had no idea I was going to be a part of the majority party.

Now you’re in the minority.
I’m in the majority.

But aren’t you a Republican?
I am. But I’m a part of the Obama team. And they’re the majority party.

Does that make for any awkwardness with your fellow Republicans?
Not one bit. I’ve had a lot of Republicans calling me asking me how they can get some of the stimulus money and how they can get their projects funded.

…But if Americans increasingly get around by rail, bus and bicycle, as you’ve planned, who will be buying cars in the future?
I think everybody will have an automobile. I think it’s amazing in America when you drive around and look at new homes that are being built, there are three-car garages. I don’t think you’re going to see families with three cars. I think you’re going to see families with one car, possibly two.

We will change our lifestyles to conform with the state religion of our moral betters, regardless of the economic madness of it, or the impact on our personal freedom.

[Update a couple minutes later]

And then there’s this:

It is a six-mile stretch of guardrail near a manufactured lake in a desolate patch of the Oklahoma Panhandle. There’s little reason for anyone to visit. Weeds are overgrown; the lake bed is virtually dry.

Yet repairing the guardrail is on a list of projects developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to tap into President Obama’s $787-billion economic stimulus program.

The country’s in the very best of hands.

Technology and Society

A “Breakthrough” In Appetite Suppression

16 Comments

Via Futurepundit:

The brain injection part isn’t exactly appealing. But surely some appetite-cutting compounds will be able to travel via the blood. After all, appetite is influenced by the hormone ghrelin (secreted epsilon cells of the pancreas and P/D1 cells of the stomach) and leptin (secreted by adipose tissues). So the blood does contain compounds that make it into the brain.

While we are living in an era with a high prevalence of obesity we are nearing the end of that era. 20 years from now I expect obesity to be rare in developed countries as drugs that suppress appetite hit the market.

So, if they can get around the “brain injection” part, sounds great. Right?

Not to me.

Let’s start with the fact that it is not our appetites, per se, that make us obese. Throughout history, humans with our appetites have not been, for the most part, obese.

It is a combination of our appetites with a body inherited by evolution to resist losing weight in times of scarcity, and plentiful high-glycemic carbohydrates unavailable to our pre-agricultural ancestors, and a lack of need to go running miles a day with a heavy load to bring home food. We are obese because food that is bad for us is cheap, we don’t exercise much any more because we have figured out how to do a living at a desk, and our bodies haven’t caught up.

But you know what?

I like my appetites. I think that appetites are one of the things that make us human. I like digging into a juicy filet mignon, a succulent lobster dipped in butter, an artichoke. I love the taste (and smell) of fresh bread coming out of the oven.

And you know what else? I really like engaging various of my bodily parts with those of another person of the opposite sex, even though it makes no sense, from an intellectual standpoint. I even like thinking about it, or looking at pictures of other people doing it (though not anywhere near as much as actually doing it). That’s an appetite, too. And one that decreases with age, but I haven’t noticed that it’s made me (or I imagine many others) any happier. And (at least from the literature) the age-related decrease seems to be increased in females, which doesn’t in any way enhance the happiness of many males for whom the decrease has been less, particularly when they are the only females available, sans adultery. That seems like a more worthy problem to attack than “reducing appetite.”

Yes, I know that some transhumanists (like Hans Moravec) want to be a robot. This has been the platonic ideal going back at least to…well…Plato. You know, the body distracts us from the higher values of the intellect…bla, bla, bla.

But does the intellect really make life worth living? The platonists, the transhumanists, would like to persuade us that it does, that properly implemented, the pleasures of the intellect will vastly exceed the base carnal pleasures of this rotting form.

Well, maybe. But even though I’m from Michigan, my darling Patricia is from Missouri. Show us.

Then, maybe.

But mere showing won’t be enough of course. We’d have to have a personal demonstration, in which thinking about…whatever…beats an orgasm, or even biting into a delicious meal.

Maybe suppressing appetites is the future, but I hope not, at least for the immediate future. I’d like to think that there are better redesigns of the body to prevent obesity. Because I like my appetite for food, and my appetite for other things, and if this is where technology is taking us, sign me…not up.

Of course, with the current administration, which clearly wants to put the government in charge of our health care, and which will be looking for ways to reduce the cost of such, and obesity being viewed as one of the primary causes of health-care costs, don’t expect that it will merely pay for appetite suppressants, brain injected or otherwise.

Expect them to be compulsory.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary

Lacking A Sense Of Irony

2 Comments

A Canadian government censor censors herself:

Any guest who pulls such a stunt deserves to be exposed for it. But a censor like Lynch, claiming to respect free speech and claiming to want a debate? Well the Orwellian hypocrisy was just too delicious for CTV to ignore. Clark opened with a powerful — but professional — timeline of Lynch’s bad behaviour. And he ended his interview with Dufresne with a pretty basic question: would you ever debate Levant? Dufresne pretended he didn’t hear the question — but tens of thousands of CTV viewers did.

The CHRC’s media magic at work!

I don’t understand why Harper’s government tolerates this. Doesn’t she work for him?

Media Criticism, Political Commentary

Defining Terrorism Down

2 Comments

Well, now we know who the administration considers “terrorists:”

The important part comes at the end: an email exchange between Matthew Feldman, attorney on the President’s Auto Task Force, and Robert Manzo, Chrysler restructuring expert. Manzo is basically pleading to further negotiate to prevent bankruptcy, but Feldman is having none of it. Here is the exchange:

Robert Manzo, Chrysler restructuring expert: “I hope you think it’s worth giving this one more shot.”

Matthew Feldman, attorney on the President’s Auto Task Force: “I’m now not talking to you. You went where you shouldn’t.”

Manzo: “Sorry. I didnt’ mean to say the wrong thing and I obviously did. I was trying oto make sure that if we had to contribute to the solution you knew we had some room. Sorry I did not realize the mistake!!”

Feldman: “It’s over. The President doesn’t negotiate second rounds. We’ve given and lent billions of dollars so your team could manage this properly….And now you’re telling me to bend over to a terrorist like Lauria? That’s B.S.”

A terrorist like Lauria? Lauria represented a teacher’s pension fund in Indiana (among other bondholders), and had the temerity to insist that the government follow contract law.

Yeah, how dare he? And on top of that he had the audacity to point out that he was being muscled by thugs, Chicago style.

Meanwhile, the new director of the DHS says that terrorism doesn’t really exist — its just “human-caused disasters.”

Media Criticism, Political Commentary

“Retreat Into Apathy”

7 Comments

Mark Steyn:

As Louis XV is said to have predicted, “Après moi, le deluge” — which seems as incisive an observation as any on a world in which freeborn citizens of the wealthiest societies in human history are content to rise from their beds every half-hour every night and traipse to the toilet for yet another flush simply because a government bureaucracy orders them to do so. “Health” is potentially a big-ticket item, but so’s a house and a car, and most folks manage to handle those without a Government Accommodation Plan or a Government Motor Vehicles System — or, at any rate, they did in pre-bailout America.

More important, there is a cost to governmentalizing every responsibility of adulthood — and it is, in Lord Whitelaw’s phrase, the stirring up of apathy. If you wander round Liverpool or Antwerp, Hamburg or Lyons, the fatalism is palpable. In Britain, once the crucible of freedom, civic life is all but dead: In Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland, some three-quarters of the economy is government spending; a malign alliance between state bureaucrats and state dependents has corroded democracy, perhaps irreparably. In England, the ground ceded to the worst sociopathic pathologies advances every day — and the latest report on “the seven evils” afflicting an ever more unlovely land blames “poverty” and “individualism,” failing to understand that if you remove the burdens of individual responsibility while loosening all restraint on individual hedonism the vaporization of the public space is all but inevitable. In Ontario, Christine Elliott, a candidate for the leadership of the so-called Conservative party, is praised by the media for offering a more emollient conservatism predicated on “the need to take care of vulnerable people.”

Look, by historical standards, we’re loaded: We have TVs and iPods and machines to wash our clothes and our dishes. We’re the first society in which a symptom of poverty is obesity: Every man his own William Howard Taft. Of course we’re “vulnerable”: By definition, we always are. But to demand a government organized on the principle of preemptively “taking care” of potential “vulnerabilities” is to make all of us, in the long run, far more vulnerable. A society of children cannot survive, no matter how all-embracing the government nanny.

And it’s an awfully hard process to reverse, once it “progresses” far enough.